"We take this opportunity to remind all subscribers of the obligation to have a reserve tank of at least 120 liters per person per day, for five days, in the case of domestic consumption, and 250 liters per person ...
"We take this opportunity to remind all subscribers of the obligation to have a reserve tank of at least 120 liters per person per day, for five days, in the case of domestic consumption, and 250 liters per person per day, for five days, in the case of residential tourism consumption." That is the tagline that Inalsa added to the statement where it acknowledged last week that it is cutting off water to several towns on the island because it is unable to meet demand. The same tagline that it adds every time it leaves streets, neighborhoods or entire towns without supply. And for that, they rely on the Regulations of the Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Service of the Island of Lanzarote, published in the Official Gazette of the Province of Las Palmas in May 2003.
In this way, in addition to not reporting the cuts, in addition to evidencing its poor performance as a company, it blames the residents for having run out of water, for not complying with a regulation that they pulled out of their sleeve a few years ago, given their own inability to guarantee the provision of a basic service. That is to say, they do not comply with anything, they do not have minimum reserves and they have even been supplying non-potable water to many towns in the south for two years, but they do have the nerve to remind users of their obligations.
This week, the Cabildo's Data Center published its annual survey on island issues, which reflects the deep discomfort of citizens with the Lanzarote political class, and with the situation on the island. In addition to failing the government and the opposition, the respondents also assessed the quality of life on the island, giving it the regrettable score of 2.2 points out of 10. It may seem excessive and more the result of indignation than a real analysis of the situation, but the anger of society is understandable when observing the state of the island's most basic infrastructures.
Inalsa, without a doubt, may be one of the most blatant examples. A company that operates as if it were a monopoly, since everyone (with the exception of certain areas where it itself has not been able to reach) is obliged to buy and pay for water, has been practically bankrupt for years. In addition, it has deplorable infrastructures, dizzying losses in the network, continuous breakdowns whose repairs sometimes take forever and is unable to cover the demand in the face of the slightest contingency. If in the middle of March they have justified the cuts alleging that demand has increased due to the greater presence of tourists on the island, what do they leave for the months of July and August?
To all this, of course, we must add that they are not even capable of maintaining a minimum policy of communication and respect towards citizens, and that they only bother to inform when the issue has really jumped to the media, either through citizen complaints or, as in this last occasion, through the public protest of the Teguise City Council. They do not bother to warn of the cuts, which as they now acknowledge were being scheduled, nor is anything known about the company's economic situation. And it is that since the receivership entered, a year and a half ago, what happens in Inalsa is a real mystery, even for the seven town councils, despite the fact that they all make up the Island Water Consortium.
Unfortunately, the case of Inalsa is not an exception. Other basic infrastructures, such as rainwater networks or roads, to give just two examples, are also not up to par with a modern society. However, as with Inalsa, in this case citizens also see how they are required to fulfill their obligation to pay taxes, but do not receive the services they deserve in return.
This panorama, added to the current economic crisis, with an exorbitant unemployment rate, makes understandable the terrible score that citizens give to the quality of life in Lanzarote. And it is that far from advancing, the island seems to have regressed in the last two decades.
In 1997, the people of Lanzarote valued the quality of life on the island with a 6.4. Now, 14 years later, it has fallen to a worrying 2.2. And that cannot be blamed only on the current crisis. On the one hand, because it would not have hit us in this way if speculation had not insisted on squeezing the island with the help of certain politicians. On the other hand, because there are investments that were necessary and should have been made a long time ago, precisely in the "golden" era. The problem is that the years of bonanza, apparently, only served to enrich a few.
Although in this survey citizens place issues such as unemployment, urban planning or health among their main concerns, it is also significant that they point to politicians as the third most important problem in Lanzarote. And it is that ultimately, they are the ones who for years have led the island to the current situation, either due to a complete incompetence or because, as in some cases judicial operations have highlighted, they were too busy looting the institutions, selling the island and increasing their wealth.
